SEC Targets Broker-Dealer Implications of Transaction-Based Deal Fees

Jun 3, 2016

Reading Time : 2 min

Services Provided

The SEC claimed that the adviser violated broker-dealer registration requirements when it performed brokerage services on behalf of fund portfolio companies in-house instead of using investment banks and broker-dealers. In particular, the SEC emphasized that the investment adviser performed the following services:

  • solicitation of deals
  • identification of buyers or sellers
  • negotiation and structuring of transactions
  • arranging of financing
  • execution of the transactions.

Compensation Paid

The enforcement action did not expressly address whether the compensation was subject to offset against the management fee paid by the fund client, but it did state that the adviser had received approximately $1.9 million in transaction-based compensation in connection with providing the brokerage services and that the transaction and brokerage fees were expressly permitted in the fund documents. A senior member of the SEC staff has previously stated, “to the extent the advisory fee is wholly reduced or offset by the amount of the transaction fee, one might view the [transaction] fee as another way to pay the advisory fee, which, in my view, in itself would not appear to raise broker-dealer registration concerns.”2 

Other Conduct

In addition to the unregistered broker-dealer activity, the SEC also included the following as bases for enforcement:

  • undisclosed use of fund assets, such as
    • portfolio company payments to employees of the adviser for operating partner oversight fees to provide services until suitable portfolio company employees could be retained
    • political contributions by the advised funds
    • charitable contributions by the advised funds
    • payment for a portion of a luxury suite at an arena without retaining adequate records to show personal and business use
  • the purchase of securities of a fund portfolio company from a departing employee  by the principal of the adviser without “disclosing its financial interest or obtaining appropriate consent to engage in the transaction”
  • the undisclosed waiver of the obligation to contribute capital for future drawdowns for limited partner interests in the advised funds acquired by the principal
  • the failure to adopt policies and procedures designed to prevent the above violations.

Several of the “undisclosed” fees and expenses were disclosed to investors after the fund had launched, but the SEC viewed such disclosure as ineffective because the disclosure was made after the contribution of capital by the investors and no ability to withdraw was offered. Also, some of the undisclosed uses of fund assets were repaid to the fund with interest.

Conclusion

The SEC will likely look for other cases in which investment advisers have received compensation for what the SEC views as broker-dealer services. Private equity fund advisers should examine their practices and their offset policies. Also, private equity advisers should continue to review the fees and expenses at the fund and portfolio company level, as the SEC and its staff will continue to scrutinize them.


 

1 In the Matter of Blackstreet Capital Management, LLC and Murry N. Gunty, Exchange Act Release 77959 (June 1, 2016) available here

2 David W. Blass, Chief Counsel, Division of Trading and Markets, A Few Observations in the Private Fund Space, Address at the Trading and Markets Subcommittee Meeting of the American Bar Association (Apr. 5, 2013) available here.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.